TheRPGSite

What's the best rpg for investigation? One of the many incarnations of Cthulhu? Or some other gumshoe game?

Investigation and mystery seem like something that is easily divorced from mechanics. Just go out and talk to people and look around to gather clues. No special investigation rules need apply, IMO.

I've heard a lot of god things about the Gumshoe engine and Night's Black Agents.

In my experience, investigative RPGs depend much, much more on the conclusions and wits of the players and have little to do with the mechanics of the game. If anything, an ubostrusive and intuitive system that can disappear into the background and doesn't interrupt the flow of the game is probably the best (as usual, but more so). BRP/Call of Cthulhu does that pretty well.
The gumshoe system on the other hand is mostly bookkeeping. I really like the take on settings and the adventure modules like the Armitage Files and Eternal Lies are as good as anything ever published for CoC, but the system is more interruptive than I like and keeping track of all the skill pools is more annoying than contributive to the game.

DC Heroes and its RAPS results for using Detective skill.

Gumshoe, every single damn time, because it assumes that my characters are professionals who know what they are doing, rather than bumbling idiots beholden to the will of the percentile dice.

There are lots of bits in Gumshoe where the dice can let you down, and that's fine, but actually investigating isn't one of them.

Quote from: Beagle;807447The gumshoe system on the other hand is mostly bookkeeping. I really like the take on settings and the adventure modules like the Armitage Files and Eternal Lies are as good as anything ever published for CoC, but the system is more interruptive than I like and keeping track of all the skill pools is more annoying than contributive to the game.

See, I find the complete opposite. I remember what types of investigative skills my character has, and when it comes to using them in play, "look at sheet and see if I have points in that pool to spend, then spend if necessary" is less faff than "look at sheet for mechanic number, roll dice, apply game mechanic". Gumshoe has a shorter break in the player / GM conversation.

Although that said, I think we've played investigative scenarios in every system we play. I love my Laundry Files and SLA investigators in particular, but that's because of their characters (Even the one who is actually a bumbling idiot).

Quote from: Beagle;807447In my experience, investigative RPGs depend much, much more on the conclusions and wits of the players and have little to do with the mechanics of the game. If anything, an ubostrusive and intuitive system that can disappear into the background and doesn't interrupt the flow of the game is probably the best (as usual, but more so). BRP/Call of Cthulhu does that pretty well.
The gumshoe system on the other hand is mostly bookkeeping. I really like the take on settings and the adventure modules like the Armitage Files and Eternal Lies are as good as anything ever published for CoC, but the system is more interruptive than I like and keeping track of all the skill pools is more annoying than contributive to the game.

But a lot of games have a lot of focus on the mechanics and that can actually impede investigation
So D&D has lots of rules about combat. Most of the special skills and powers people get to pick relate to combat. Even levels and HPs are a primarily combat focused mechanic. You can run investigations in D&D, I have done loads, but the rules actively hinder you because the players want to use the new powers they have picked up and that means they look for opportunities.

So whilst you don't need specific investigative rules some systems are actively hostile. The key is a good GM any player can be directed down an investigative scenario just through how the GM presents the game world.

I've never had trouble running investigative stuff in BRP Call of Cthulhu but I like the directions on investigation and research in Precis Intermedia's Mean Streets RPG.

Quote from: 3rik;807491I've never had trouble running investigative stuff in BRP Call of Cthulhu but I like the directions on investigation and research in Precis Intermedia's Mean Streets RPG.

What are the directions and what do you like about them?

I've seen plenty of investigations run in D&D as well... I've never thought the rules worked against it, though they do make for a very different sort of mystery given the presence of spells like 'detect magic', 'sense motive'... anything that lets you speak with the dead.
If anything is inhibiting investigations it's Player expectations and attitudes... thinking they can fight their way through any problem. If that's how they want to play then there's no point in throwing drawing room puzzles at them.

Something like Gumshoe fails for me by creating a metagame economy that I do not want in the interest of 'fixing' rules issues that never existed.
ToC is a good sourcebook for CoC though.

Quote from: Bren;807493What are the directions and what do you like about them?

Common-sense and concise practical advice on handling different categories of clues: overt clues, hidden clues, cryptic clues, forensic clues, serendipitous clues and random clues.

The same section can be found in Ghostories, by the way.

I like that it's all very practical and can be easily applied to your game without requiring all kinds of hip nifty meta level mechanics.

Gumshoe is definitely worth looking into if you're interested in investigative games but I would also highly recommend checking out Mean Streets and Ghostories too. They both use the GenreDiversion i system and are pretty light but robust. They are also a bit more traditional than Gumshoe and, as 3rik points out, have some good advice in them.

Whichever games you pick up it is also worth getting GURPS Mysteries. There's some great advice in that book.

Justice, Inc. (http://rpggeek.com/rpgitem/47975/justice-inc)

(http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic514720_md.jpg)

Quote from: 3rik;807503Common-sense and concise practical advice on handling different categories of clues: overt clues, hidden clues, cryptic clues, forensic clues, serendipitous clues and random clues.

The same section can be found in Ghostories, by the way.

I like that it's all very practical and can be easily applied to your game without requiring all kinds of hip nifty meta level mechanics.

It sounds like it might be interesting. Any more information you can provide, maybe an example or two?

Has anyone converted or used the advice and categories with other systems?

Quote from: Bren;807509It sounds like it might be interesting. Any more information you can provide, maybe an example or two?

Has anyone converted or used the advice and categories with other systems?

Haha, it's all so concise that quoting any of it may already be giving away too much. The whole thing takes up about one page. You'd have to ask Brett.

Quote from: 3rik;807511Haha, it's all so concise that quoting any of it may already be giving away too much. The whole thing takes up about one page. You'd have to ask Brett.

Does he post here?...Brett...calling Brett.

Quote from: NinjaWeasel;807506Whichever games you pick up it is also worth getting GURPS Mysteries. There's some great advice in that book.

Second that, that book is great for any game that's going to features investigations... lots of ideas and suggestions.

Call of Cthulhu does it well.

I have heard that Top Secret can.

Dragon had at least one murder mystery module. I am pretty sure some of the Dungeon modules did too.

Albedo can, though most players seem to focus on the war side. Same for Shadowrun. Theres great potential there for all sorts of investigative play. Same can probably be said for Ravenloft. The potential is there mostly untapped.

Quote from: Simlasa;807494I've seen plenty of investigations run in D&D as well... I've never thought the rules worked against it, though they do make for a very different sort of mystery given the presence of spells like 'detect magic', 'sense motive'... anything that lets you speak with the dead.
If anything is inhibiting investigations it's Player expectations and attitudes... thinking they can fight their way through any problem. If that's how they want to play then there's no point in throwing drawing room puzzles at them.

Something like Gumshoe fails for me by creating a metagame economy that I do not want in the interest of 'fixing' rules issues that never existed.
ToC is a good sourcebook for CoC though.

Yeah I have run D&D investigations myself, you can get round all the magic stuff just by thinking like a criminal who is aware of all that stuff :)

But as you say the players have other expectations and they have those because so much of the game is devoted to combat so why wouldn't they.

I agree with 3ric about Mean Streets and Ghostories. I like BRP as well, because of it's clear rules and it's combination of investigation and horror. I like conspiracies and the paranormal as well so I like Delta Green a lot. You could run a good investigation in the nWoD, but I think Cthulhu and Ghostories are more geared towards being an investigator and they have more mental skills that involve knowledge of artifacts or dead languages. I also find them more practical in writing style.

I like to give a heads up to Deadlands Noir. Very practical and flavorful. The mystery generator is very handy and the city layout of New Orleans is very clear. Great city map and some good combat maps as well.

Quote from: Bren;807517Does he post here?...Brett...calling Brett.

I believe he's even one of the mods. Perhaps sending him a PM would be more effective.

Quote from: 3rik;807619I believe he's even one of the mods. Perhaps sending him a PM would be more effective.

Is he brettmb listed as Administrator?

You rang? I didn't quite catch the question.

Quote from: brettmb;807629You rang? I didn't quite catch the question.

Hi, thanks for popping in.

Here is the context and background: 3rik mentioned that they liked "the directions on investigation and research in Precis Intermedia's Mean Streets RPG[/QUOTE]" that the directions provided "[c]ommon-sense and concise practical advice on handling different categories of clues: overt clues, hidden clues, cryptic clues, forensic clues, serendipitous clues and random clues." 3rik also mentioned that the same section could be found in Ghostories.


What I was Looking for: Any additional information you felt comfortable sharing. 3rik said that the section in the rules was not too long and they were reluctant to quote in detail. If there are mechanical aspects to how mysteries are handled, how easy it would be to port those aspects over to other systems.

It really is just common sense advice, simply broken down into different classifications...

Overt clues are in plain sight - these are letters sitting on a desk or blood stains on a jacket. Decide on a general level of competence needed to discover these - if a character has that level, success.

Hidden clues require a search - these require a task when searching in a particular location; adjust difficulty accordingly.

Cryptic clues are not only hidden from sight, but so are their meanings - a hidden piece of paper that also holds a code written as prose. Not only must the clue be found, but it must also be deciphered with an appropriate task and research.

Forensic clues rely on specialized training and laboratory time. This is time-consuming.

Serendipitous clues fall into the characters' laps - dripping blood from above or tripping over a dead body. These are plot devices used to steer characters a certain way, typically when investigations have not gone well.

Random clues - randomly determine who, what, where, etc.

That's pretty much it.

Quote from: brettmb;807637It really is just common sense advice, simply broken down into different classifications...

Cool. :cool: Thanks! :)

I like the classifications. They provide a method of analyzing what is required to solve the mystery. Also listing clues in order is a nice way of summarizing the clues available in a scene or at a location. Sometimes as the GM I forget one of my own clues. So a checklist or summary is helpful for me. Even more helpful in published material.

What do you see as the major selling points or attractions to Mean Streets or Ghostories?

Quote from: brettmb;807637It really is just common sense advice, simply broken down into different classifications...

How would you classify clues that come from talking to people, friendly or otherwise? Not exactly hidden but you have to know who to ask and what to ask.
The Raymond Chandler/Dashiell Hammett/Mickey Spillane stories I've read seem to favor clues coming through conversation and interrogation... which is something I'd be likely to roleplay rather than roll dice for.

Quote from: Simlasa;807657which is something I'd be likely to roleplay rather than roll dice for.

You just said it - use roleplaying, but I would also throw in some tasks to put pieces of the puzzle together (using instinct, observation, or even research). A tongue can also slip - this would be a serendipitous clue.

Quote from: Bren;807642What do you see as the major selling points or attractions to Mean Streets or Ghostories?

Mean Streets is Noir Roleplaying - it features using contacts, investigations, your wits, and a little violence to navigate the seedy streets, corrupt politicians, overzealous police, and organized crime. Three adventures are included in the expanded version.

Ghostories does the same for paranormal investigations, portraying either innocents (regular people) or the tainted (those with supernatural abilities). Characters follow a pursuit (there is an innocent and tainted version of each)  - for example, faith can lead to the divine arts, empathy can lead to a sixth sense, or science can lead to binding spirits. Then there are different types of tainted entities, from ghosts and embodied spirits to ghouls and werewolves. A number of ready-to-run scenarios are included.

The expanded versions are recommended for maximum value.

Deadlands Noir does something similar. It divides clues in three categories: physical clues (blood, fingerprints), testimonial clues (witnesses) and documentary clues (documents). I like Precis btw. Very concise and practical.

Gumshoe let's you find clues automatically? No rolling for clue searching?

Quote from: jan paparazzi;807790Gumshoe let's you find clues automatically? No rolling for clue searching?

If you've got the relevant investigative ability, and you're in the place where the clue is and doing something that would logically get you the clue, bam, you get it. You can spend points from investigative pools to get more detailed clues, but that's it.

Of course, if you're not there, no clue. If you just turn up and look around, without trying to interact with anything, no clue 4 u. If you interpret the clues wrong, tough shit, dumbass. But what can't happen is that you do all the right things and fail to see the clue because of a bad die roll.

It's much simpler to implement common sense and The Three Clue Rule (http://thealexandrian.net/wordpress/1118/roleplaying-games/three-clue-rule). No need for extra mechanical widgetry.

Quote from: Ladybird;807792You can spend points from investigative pools to get more detailed clues, but that's it.

To me, this point-spending mechanic seems very metagamy and anti-immersive. So, what happens if I for some reason I decide to spend all my points at once? What does this investigative pool emulate? Why would you bother using it at all if you know you're already going to get all the clues necessary for following the investigative trail? How does the GM manage to come up with more detailed clues every time I decide to spend some points? What happens if you run out of points? What does this emulate? You're too tired to do more research?

Also, misinterpreted clues can still lead to dead trails, so the "problem" has only been shifted.

Quote from: Simlasa;807815It's much simpler to implement common sense and The Three Clue Rule (http://thealexandrian.net/wordpress/1118/roleplaying-games/three-clue-rule). No need for extra mechanical widgetry.

tl;dr only skimmed - I'm sure this works pretty well, but the number three seems kind of arbitrary. It would also imply you can never have less than three clues, even if they're impossible to miss and can't be misinterpreted.

Quote from: Simlasa;807815It's much simpler to implement common sense and The Three Clue Rule (http://thealexandrian.net/wordpress/1118/roleplaying-games/three-clue-rule). No need for extra mechanical widgetry.

I'm partial myself more to Gumshoe's GMing advice none the less, which had a great influence on how I run my CoC games. The emphasis on not rolling for things that should be relatively easy found (and rolling to give additional information that helps solve the mystery ahead, but is not necessary if players are smart enough) was good advice.

Quote from: 3rik;807816So, what happens if I spend all my points at once? What does this investigative pool emulate? Why would you bother using it at all if you know you're already going to get all the clues necessary for following the investigative trail? How does the GM manage to come up with more detailed clues every time I decide to spend some points?

1) Well, just like if you'd drink all your health potions at once, you're now resourceless to pursue a better path? You just get the core clues if you can.

2) The difference is between say, discovering green slime and getting a clue from using a Chemistry point what the green slime is composed of. Or perhaps spend a Mythos point to realise that this is no earthly green slime.

3) Same as when the players go left rather than right as he expected.

Ultimately, I myself find best to play with a certain Gumshoe inspired mindset and advice, but take mechanics that I more prefer - as I said countless times, I really dislike the General Abilities mechanic.

Quote from: 3rik;807816So, what happens if I spend all my points at once? What does this investigative pool emulate? Why would you bother using it at all if you know you're already going to get all the clues necessary for following the investigative trail? How does the GM manage to come up with more detailed clues every time I decide to spend some points?

Here's the SRD. (http://pelgranepress.com/site/?p=13319)

Quote from: Rincewind1;807820I'm partial myself more to Gumshoe's GMing advice none the less, which had a great influence on how I run my CoC games. The emphasis on not rolling for things that should be relatively easy found (and rolling to give additional information that helps solve the mystery ahead, but is not necessary if players are smart enough) was good advice.

I guess that's what I meant by 'common sense'... not making folks roll for easy/obvious stuff. Rather than buying into the propaganda that CoC/BRP demands that people can't see their feet if they fail a 'spot' roll. That advice isn't new or peculiar to Gumshoe.
A lot of times we don't ask for any rolls at all... just 'Where do you look and how long do you want to spend doing it?'

I don't think The Three Clue Rule so narrow in its intent as to be locked to the number 3... it's just arguing for having multiple paths to a solution... avoiding bottlenecks like 'The PCs MUST speak to the old man on dock 3'.

Quote from: Simlasa;807826That advice isn't new or peculiar to Gumshoe.

Maybe not, but the fact that it keeps getting repeated evidently means it hasn't sunk in yet, it's still evidently a common GM mistake.

Quote from: Ladybird;807831Maybe not, but the fact that it keeps getting repeated evidently means it hasn't sunk in yet, it's still evidently a common GM mistake.

Yeah, it's almost like they ENJOY rolling dice.

I am partial to Streets of Bedlam for Savage Worlds. The Crime Scene rules therein assume that characters will always find something - they just might find the wrong thing, or draw the wrong conclusions from it, but either way the game gets going.
What is also nice is that a Crime Scene can be set up on the fly, just based on a skill roll and a few card draws. So when the PCs do something nasty, and you need to know if and how close Johnny Law will get to them, you can use the same rules for your copper NPCs to see what theories they come up with.

What makes this interesting is that other than that system (and some sort of "social combat" system for interrogations) it stays a bog standard trad game, except for some pieces of advice on investigative adventures. It's a tool for helping with pedestrian tasks, not a stick to force the GM.
I plan to plug it into my next cyberpunk game to determine what corps and coppers find out when PCs pull off their usual shenanigans.

Streets of Bedlam was already on my wishlist and I will certainly buy it.

I am still a bit in doubt wether or not I like an automatic clue find mechanic like Streets of Bedlam or Gumshoe has. I guess I have to try it to find out.

I've done a lot of thinking about running investigative adventures. I think the roadblock that hit people is that they end up treating them as either railroads or slideshows of events. Gumshoe, for all it does, hasn't quite cracked the adventure creation issue, because they're attempting to mimic the form of mystery novels. A mystery is a dungeon.

Think of it like this: you walk into a dungeon room with three doors. Those doors might be trapped or they might have monsters behind them. But you, as the player know that if you interact with one of those doors something will happen. The same goes for a hex crawl: the players can see the map and know that if they go north or south, something will happen, because they have the visual cues that *there* are mountains and *there* is a swamp.

It's not quite so obvious with a mystery setting, but it has to be. When the players find the body, there has to be several obvious paths they can take, and akin to the doors in a dungeon, the player has to know that this action will lead to more options. I see a mystery adventure as a series of interconnected nodes that the players can Clue Crawl through.

I honestly find it funny that Gumshoe gets poopooed a lot.

Honestly, it is actually very OD&D like on investigation: You ask the right question, you get the answer. The only difference is that you have binary skills in the middle that are "do you have the right skill to thoroughly investigate that question"

Gumshoe puts a lot of emphasis on the roleplaying part, you don't automatically give someone a clue because they show up, they have to ask the right question first.

Personally, I'm a fan of Gumshoe. Specifically Mutant City Blues, because I think its a neat setting.

Quote from: Emperor Norton;808183I honestly find it funny that Gumshoe gets poopooed a lot.

My main issue with Gumshoe (specifically ToC) is that it claimed to 'fix' things that weren't broken in the first place by adding extra mechanics.
Most games let you ask questions and get answers... use Skills/Backgrounds or whatever to suggest why you should have the more difficult to find answers. No rolling for the obvious stuff. I don't see any huge revelation.

Quote from: Simlasa;808199I don't see any huge revelation.

That's because you like Roleplaying. :D

Quote from: Simlasa;808199My main issue with Gumshoe (specifically ToC) is that it claimed to 'fix' things that weren't broken in the first place by adding extra mechanics.
Most games let you ask questions and get answers... use Skills/Backgrounds or whatever to suggest why you should have the more difficult to find answers. No rolling for the obvious stuff. I don't see any huge revelation.

It's the reason why I ultimately like the Gumshoe advice, but prefer % systems - it's easier for me to bolt the ideas onto a mechanic I like and am comfortable in, rather than deal with poor General Skills mechanic.

I guess the "revelation" I had is simply the elegance of the solution, at least I found it as such. That and I do like the Investigative Abilities Spend Mechanics (Mythos Points might be metagaming, but I did like the application of the skill as a Sanity - paid joker).

Quote from: CRKrueger;808201That's because you like Roleplaying. :D

I thought roleplaying got in the way of maximising the XP from the dungeon, or adventure gaming.

Quote from: Rincewind1;808202That and I do like the Investigative Abilities Spend Mechanics (Mythos Points might be metagaming, but I did like the application of the skill as a Sanity - paid joker).

Yeah, mechanically that's the bit I particularly DON'T like. But matters of taste and whatnot...

Quote from: jan paparazzi;808177I am still a bit in doubt wether or not I like an automatic clue find mechanic like Streets of Bedlam or Gumshoe has. I guess I have to try it to find out.

If it's not automatic, NOT finding a clue should NOT be a doorstopper. That's all.

Another way to go about it is to have the players roll for searching a room, but interpret the result in terms of how well they conduct their search, not if they find a clue or not. If they mess up, they still find the clue, but there will be unpleasant consequences to their bad rolling.

You can use different approaches for different (types of) clues in the same scenario.

Quote from: 3rik;808210Another way to go about it is to have the players roll for searching a room, but interpret the result in terms of how well they conduct their search, not if they find a clue or not.

It's simple enough to tie the results of a roll to how long it takes them to find the whatsit... then see if they're confident enough there's something to find to make it worth spending that long searching.
Then again, if there was nothing to find in the first place... it's all up to them how long they keep looking before they give up. I wouldn't have a great roll make a clue appear where there was none.

Quote from: Simlasa;808215It's simple enough to tie the results of a roll to how long it takes them to find the whatsit... then see if they're confident enough there's something to find to make it worth spending that long searching.
Then again, if there was nothing to find in the first place... it's all up to them how long they keep looking before they give up. I wouldn't have a great roll make a clue appear where there was none.

Erm yeah, I forgot to add that I was assuming there's actually a clue to be found. I'm not in the habit of moving clues around according to where the PCs are looking, though for some that may also be a valid option.

If they're looking in the wrong place and conduct a failed search, they won't find a clue and there will be unpleasant consequences to their failed roll.

Quote from: 3rik;808246If they're looking in the wrong place and conduct a failed search, they won't find a clue and there will be unpleasant consequences to their failed roll.

What sort of unpleasant consequences? And why are unpleasant consequences a consequence of a failed search in the wrong place? That seems like a non sequitur.

Quote from: 3rik;808210If it's not automatic, NOT finding a clue should NOT be a doorstopper. That's all.

Another way to go about it is to have the players roll for searching a room, but interpret the result in terms of how well they conduct their search, not if they find a clue or not. If they mess up, they still find the clue, but there will be unpleasant consequences to their bad rolling.

You can use different approaches for different (types of) clues in the same scenario.

So not a Gumshoe fan?

I'm going to be different and say InSpectres.

InSpectres avoids the problems with railroading vs. the game coming to a screeching halt for lack of finding a clue by simply not defining the solution to the mystery at all. The GM sets up the mystery, the players investigate.. and the rolls determine if what they think is happening is really happening. Everyone can wind up surprised.

It's intended for humorous supernatural investigation, like Ghostbusters, but the attitude of the players and GM will determine whether the mystery is ridiculious, mildly funny, or completely serious. To make it feel less like improv comedy, the GM can do more prep: define a couple suspects beforehand, clues that point to them specifically, and clues that *could* point to any of them. Investigations reveal which of the suspects is responsible, or whether it is more complicated (two responsible parties, one partially responsible, and other variations.)

Quote from: talysman;808312It's intended for humorous supernatural investigation, like Ghostbusters, but the attitude of the players and GM will determine whether the mystery is ridiculious, mildly funny, or completely serious. To make it feel less like improv comedy, the GM can do more prep: define a couple suspects beforehand, clues that point to them specifically, and clues that *could* point to any of them. Investigations reveal which of the suspects is responsible, or whether it is more complicated (two responsible parties, one partially responsible, and other variations.)

That sounds like fun, but it doesn't sound like "uncovering a mystery", more "making up something mysterious".

Quote from: Ladybird;808313That sounds like fun, but it doesn't sound like "uncovering a mystery", more "making up something mysterious".

I figured it was like a GM tossing something mysterious out to a group of imaginative and talkative players and then picking one or more of their ideas about what is really going on. While it can be fun, I agree that for me, the mystery has to already have a solution for me to be able to uncover the solution.

Quote from: Ladybird;808313That sounds like fun, but it doesn't sound like "uncovering a mystery", more "making up something mysterious".

It's both. There's a starting point (people going missing at night when walking through Scary Woods, for example) and players have the opportunity to make up details along the way, or be contradicted along the way. But there's a definite point at which the mystery is solved. You have to earn "dice" during the investigation. If you think you've solved the mystery, but you haven't reached the dice goal yet, it isn't solved, and you may encounter details that contradict your solution.

And, as I said, you *could* predefine a number of possible answers beforehand, with the rolls determining whether they are actually true or not. When you reach your dice goal, any fact that hasn't been eliminated is true.

Quote from: Bren;808321I figured it was like a GM tossing something mysterious out to a group of imaginative and talkative players and then picking one or more of their ideas about what is really going on. While it can be fun, I agree that for me, the mystery has to already have a solution for me to be able to uncover the solution.

I've got the Atomic Robo RPG (Hicks may hate me due to my being filthy euroscum, but fuck it, it's Robo), and there's a "brainstorming" mechanic in there (Characters discuss stuff and roll relevant skills, high roll gets to invent a fact that "fits" the current evidence).

Again, sounds fun, and fits the theme well (AR not really being an investigative game), but you're not really "uncovering" something.

Quote from: Bren;808253What sort of unpleasant consequences? And why are unpleasant consequences a consequence of a failed search in the wrong place? That seems like a non sequitur.

You can search any place, regardless of the presence of clues, and during such a search things can go wrong: you break stuff, leave trails, get caught, accidentally set the place on fire, etc. The players decide to search a place, that search can go wrong.

Quote from: jan paparazzi;808308So not a Gumshoe fan?

I have no need for it and dislike the investigation points pools or whatever they're called.

Quote from: 3rik;808337You can search any place, regardless of the presence of clues, and during such a search things can go wrong: you break stuff, leave trails, get caught, accidentally set the place on fire, etc. The players decide to search a place, that search can go wrong.

All those consquences can apply even if you are searching the right place and even if you make your search roll.

And a failed search or a search in the wrong place can just result in wasting some time when time is not even in particularly short supply.

I read what you were saying as the bad things were a consequence of  searching in the wrong location and/or failing the search roll. Did I misread you?

Quote from: Bren;808342All those consquences can apply even if you are searching the right place and even if you make your search roll.

And a failed search or a search in the wrong place can just result in wasting some time when time is not even in particularly short supply.

I read what you were saying as the bad things were a consequence of  searching in the wrong location and/or failing the search roll. Did I misread you?

Could be my English-fu is weak. I meant to say, the bad things are a consequence of the bad rolling, regardless of the location.

Quote from: 3rik;808346Could be my English-fu is weak. I meant to say, the bad things are a consequence of the bad rolling, regardless of the location.

Ah, thanks for clarifying.

In that case it seem you are making the bad things a consquence of the bad search roll, is that right?

Quote from: Bren;808358Ah, thanks for clarifying.

In that case it seem you are making the bad things a consquence of the bad search roll, is that right?

Correct. It may not be everybody's cup of tea, but by running it this way a bad search roll does not imply a missed clue, or at least not necessarily.

1. Don't create a mystery that relies upon one single clue to unravel.
2. Don't have there be only one single way to uncover any particular clue.
3. Use skills, combinations of skills and combinations of character's specialties judiciously and creatively.  Remember, the PCs are the experts, the players might not be.
4. If all else fails, accept the fact that sometimes even extremely competent adults fail.

There you go, all done.  No narrative mechanics, metagame economy, or anything else other then Roleplaying and good old task resolution required.

Go and sin no more.

Quote from: 3rik;808412It may not be everybody's cup of tea, but by running it this way a bad search roll does not imply a missed clue, or at least not necessarily.

It would seem weird to me if consequences depended on whether the players were searching in the right place or not: "well, we've searched for a while and nothing bad has happened, so it must be the wrong place; time to move on."

Quote from: rawma;808816It would seem weird to me if consequences depended on whether the players were searching in the right place or not: "well, we've searched for a while and nothing bad has happened, so it must be the wrong place; time to move on."

Yes that would be weird. But that's not what I was saying.

Quote from: 3rik;808898Yes that would be weird. But that's not what I was saying.

I was agreeing; sorry if that wasn't clear.

Quote from: rawma;808923I was agreeing; sorry if that wasn't clear.

OK, never mind then. :)